Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31142331›Full record

ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2019

The role of patient organizations in the rare disease ecosystem in India: an interview based study.

Mohua Chakraborty Choudhury, Gayatri Saberwal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Mapping the rare disease stakeholders in India.PLOS global public health · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 'Advocacy groups are the connectors': Experiences and contributions of rare disease patient organization leaders in advanced neurotherapeutics.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Mohua Chakraborty ChoudhuryInstitute of Bioinformatics and Applied Biotechnology, Biotech Park, Electronics City Phase 1, Bengaluru, Karnataka, 560100, India.
Gayatri SaberwalInstitute of Bioinformatics and Applied Biotechnology, Biotech Park, Electronics City Phase 1, Bengaluru, Karnataka, 560100, India. gayatri@ibab.ac.in.ORCID 0000-0003-2410-1431

Funding

Science and Engineering Research Board PDF/2016/002340
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRare diseases (RDs) affect a small percentage of the population but can be severely debilitating and life-threatening. Historically, patient groups (PGs) have been the prime movers in raising awareness about these diseases and advocating for national supportive policies. They have also driven relevant research programs. In India too, PGs have made significant contributions to the national RD ecosystem.

objectiveTo assess the contribution of various Indian RD PGs, we carried out an interview-based study of 19organizations. This study aims to highlight the origins and achievements of these groups and the challenges that they have faced. The study also helps to capture the changes in the RD ecosystem that have taken place in recent years.

resultOf the 19 PGs, two are umbrella organizations, two are other organizations of national scope and 15 are disease specific groups. 14 interviewees were affected by an RD either directly or through a family member. Lack of awareness about RDs in the medical community was the biggest challenge, leading to a delay in diagnosis and subsequent management. Only two out of the 15 conditions have a definitive treatment. However, many of the diseases can be managed with replacement therapies administered for the patient's entire life, or other supportive therapies. Most diagnostics and treatment regimens that are available globally are now available in India but are expensive and usually available only in a few major cities. These problems are compounded by a lack of medical insurance schemes and government policies to support these patients. The biggest achievement of the PGs was the passing of National Policy for Treatment of Rare Diseases in 2017, unfortunately since put in abeyance. If reinstated, and properly implemented, this policy could significantly improve RD management in the country.

conclusionPGs have had a significant role in bringing diagnostics and treatments to India. They have also raised awareness about RDs and related issues such as newborn screening, prenatal diagnostics and genetic counselling. This study highlighted the recommendations of various PGs. The government should address these recommendations and institutionalize the participation of the PGs in formal decision making.

Indexed as

Rare DiseasesDelivery of Health CareHumansIndiaInterviews as TopicRegistriesSurveys and QuestionnairesDisease-specific groupPatient groupPolicyRare diseaseUmbrella organization

Identifiers

PMID31142331
PMCPMC6542017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.